At first I thought it was going to be one of those girly teen-orientated things, but thankfully not.

No, no, it’s not LOL That’s what I was saying - medieval trade is anything but girly and teeny! =)

I’m glad you liked it - I think it has it all, action, intrigue, plot twists and social commentary, and I really like the backgrounds, I wonder if they used 3D for some? Like that sparkly water…

pumeco - 11 July 2012 10:00 AM

Sure, but I wouldn’t worry about the sound quality on those, they’re uploaded by VEVO which, as far as I’m concerned, is an automatic indication that the quality is going to be crap anyway.

Well you see there’s a difference between “crappy speakers” and “bad speakers”, as in “speakers gone bad”... They hum and crackle, like a lightsaber, y’know…

I’d say VEVO follows all other digital distribution deals. I just checked, and Amy MacDonald’s stuff is officially available here as a digital release, so there’s no reason for VEVO to block the video, it does serve its promotion purpose for local customers.

Anyway, I think the sound quality was good for a youtube vid (I’m not looking for loudness, just clarity). The music is well-executed pop rock, loved the production! Does Ms MacDonald write her songs herself?

BTW the song “Spark” reminded me of that Bon Jovi hit “In These Arms”. Now, I’m not too fond of Jon’s voice, but thankfully David Bryan, the keyboardist extraordinaire who co-wrote that hit, released a version of it on his solo album… To my ears, he sings it much better than Jon does. And he plays a mean piano!!

Don’t mind me, I’m not anywhere near as shallow as some people think I am. Believe me, I’m probably the last guy on this earth who would have only a superficial attraction to women.

OK, sorry…

pumeco - 11 July 2012 10:00 AM

it’s just that I prefer how women acted, dressed, did their hair, and wore their makeup back in the 60’s and 70’s. I’m only in my thirties, but even so, I still prefer the retro thing over anything of today’s values.

To me, “retro” means a time when women looked natural and feminine (like she does), not just feminine.

I’m somewhat puzzled now… You say you like women who look natural, yet - as a woman - I don’t see that much “natural” stuff going on with the 70s and especially the 60s look… Just look at those puffed-up hairstyles which require a lot of effort - volumising mousse, back-combing, litres of hairspray and sometimes even getting a perm if your hair is naturally straight- to stay voluminous through the day. Besides, wearing makeup is never “natural”, and the 60s and 70s look usually called for a LOT of it, even in this vid… So, I’m confused…

pumeco - 11 July 2012 10:00 AM

I quite liked that Hawkwind piano track.

That’s great! They were an awesomely diverse band. Check this track out too, if you please? It’s a different side of theirs, and I love the science fiction spoken lyrics:

No, no, it’s not LOL That’s what I was saying - medieval trade is anything but girly and teeny! =)

I’m glad you liked it - I think it has it all, action, intrigue, plot twists and social commentary, and I really like the backgrounds, I wonder if they used 3D for some? Like that sparkly water…

Well, I intend to watch the next episode tonight, I just hope my sister doesn’t find out otherwise I’ll be in for an earful - lol. She bought me the Deathnote box-set for Christmas and I haven’t even got around to watching the first episode yet.

As for the water and CG, I’d have to have another look, but I remember what they did to Ghost in the Shell (the first movie), they released a new version labelled “Redux” - bloody ruined it they did. If ever you get to watch it, please avoid the Redux version at all costs, it’s just not as good as the original hand drawn film and totally destroys the feel of the original. The newly added CG parts in the Redux version stand out like a sore thumb - really bad. Luckily, even the Redux release features the original film as well, but by that time people have already ruined it for themselves by watching the updated version.

Why they did that I’ll never know, not even to make more money, they should have just restored it and left it alone.

Mustakettu85 - 12 July 2012 09:27 AM

The music is well-executed pop rock, loved the production! Does Ms MacDonald write her songs herself?

BTW the song “Spark” reminded me of that Bon Jovi hit “In These Arms”. Now, I’m not too fond of Jon’s voice, but thankfully David Bryan, the keyboardist extraordinaire who co-wrote that hit, released a version of it on his solo album… To my ears, he sings it much better than Jon does. And he plays a mean piano!!

I don’t know if she writes all of them, but I know she’s a songwriter. I don’t like the way she sings sometimes, but she certainly puts out some seriously catchy stuff. I didn’t like the David Bryan track much, a bit like Tik Tak, just did’t click with me.

Mustakettu85 - 12 July 2012 09:27 AM

I’m somewhat puzzled now… You say you like women who look natural, yet - as a woman - I don’t see that much “natural” stuff going on with the 70s and especially the 60s look… Just look at those puffed-up hairstyles which require a lot of effort - volumising mousse, back-combing, litres of hairspray and sometimes even getting a perm if your hair is naturally straight- to stay voluminous through the day. Besides, wearing makeup is never “natural”, and the 60s and 70s look usually called for a LOT of it, even in this vid… So, I’m confused…

lol - You make a really interesting point there, and it’s not one I’m going to be able to answer very easily. I suppose I’d better divide it up into sections and try to explain it that way, because while what you say makes sense in some ways, it doesn’t in others.

Her Hair:
I like most styles from that time, but the ones I like most tend to be the natural ones. I think women today have lost the plot, not just with hair, but with make-up as well. How many women nowadays (especially younger women influenced by “trends”) have taken the time to have their hair how it naturally is? Long and flat or naturally wavy, and that’s the thing, there was a lot of that about in the 60’s and 70’s, not now though. Even those that attempt it somehow manage to spoil it, even the simplest things.

For example, a woman with long hair in the 70’s would probably take a shower and comb it, that’s it, and that’s all it needed to look “natural”. Today, even the woman who wants to look retro manages to screw it up because she doesn’t understand the “natural” part of it. Sure, she’ll take a shower and comb it just like a real retro girl would, but then she’ll get all modern about it and start trimming any stray ends and going into a fit if she so much as finds - OMFG - A SPLIT END!!! She’ll make sure every hair is perfectly placed, and make it all nice and shiny with her tongs.

Now then, stick the real retro girl next to the fake retro girl and guess who’ll look natural and who won’t?

The real retro girl will ooze sex appeal. Her hair has the natural sheen to it, hasn’t been dyed, it has natural kinks and waves to it - the way she grew it, it wasn’t polished using a set of tongs. And here’s the thing, what is it that makes the modern woman assume that shiny is better? The fact is it looks ridiculous, shiny, fake, and “put on” - because that’s what it is - there’s no getting away from it.

Her Makeup:
That’s easy, the styles then we simply better. The difference between the makeup styles then and now is that back then, the makeup was used to enhance what was there, whereas now, it’s more an attempt to totally recreate a look. Again, it’s the difference between something that was naturally appealing and something that is overdone.

Her Dress Sense:
Doesn’t matter whether it’s figure hugging or loose, the clothes were way sexier then. Again, it’s not something that’s easy to pinpoint why, but “naturalness” comes into it a lot of the time. It’s no coincidence that men like images of women with scruffy hair who are dirty, filthy, blood on their thigh, rips in their jeans - and looking like they just escaped a war-zone. The reason is that (I think) we subconsciously see the beauty of “naturalness”, because in such images her scruffy hair is no longer combed to perfection, her dirty skin no longer looks like it’s made of plastic, and the rips in her jeans would never be allowed in her normal state of dress; it’s the closest she’ll ever get to showing her “natural” beauty because she doesn’t understand how to do it on her own - she watches too much TV, listens to too many know-it-all’s on YouTube, and reads too many “gossip” magazines. In her scruffy imperfect state, however, she comes across sexy because she’s no longer trying to be perfect, she’s no longer that robot that follows the same perfectly groomed trend the rest follow.

Not all women are like modern women, there are exceptions, there are women who couldn’t give a crap about what everyone else does and chooses the “retro” or some other look. Those are the ones that stand out as exceptional to me, not just because of the resulting individuality, but because a person who practices it is more a rebel and non-conformist - and I’ve always respected that.

Same can be said for audio, do you Digital or do you Analogue? - same thing. Analogue audio is far superior to anything we have in digital systems, yet some people people actually think digital is better because they’ve been brainwashed and haven’t a clue what they’re talking about. It’s the difference between something that is real (analogue) and something that is fake (digital). Same thing with women that have natural breasts and ones that carry silicone. Anyone can falsify, buy no one can make something fake that is better than it’s real equivalent - it’s physically impossible.

The Way She Acts:
Women (and men) are far too influenced by the media nowadays. The media is dangerously powerful to say the least - certainly a lot more than it was in the 70’s. In the 70’s the public run rings around the powers that be, whereas nowadays it seems everyone (almost everyone) is wrapped around the fingers of companies like Apple, Goole, and Microsoft.

If you were to present an iPod to a modern woman she’d say something like “oooh, shiny!” If you were to present an iPod to a woman of the 70’s, however, she would have been inclined to start a protest against it in order to protect industry and peoples jobs. She’d have gone topless in the street and all she would ask in return is that you let her drop a rock on the iPod - that’s my kinda woman. Attitudes have changed for the worse though, so sadly there aren’t that many women around who would love to drop a rock on an iPod (she’ll throw a fit if the price of hair spray rises above inflation though).

So that’s my explanation, it was a long reply but I can’t explain it any other way. Think of it of a combination of everything I said above, and it’s that combination that made a 70’s woman more “natural” than a woman (most women) of today’s values.

Mustakettu85 - 12 July 2012 09:27 AM

That’s great! They were an awesomely diverse band. Check this track out too, if you please? It’s a different side of theirs, and I love the science fiction spoken lyrics:

Forget your speakers for this one, just plug in your headphones and switch YouTube to the highest possible resolution for the best sound. Not only is it a fantastic musical piece (the whole album), but some will even be able to pick-up on the unmistakable fact that it’s an analogue recording. Being originally recorded in analogue means it actually sounds good (even when blessed with YouTube conversion).

Oh the beauty of things that are natural; natural women, natural audio, natural this, natural that (now I sound like a dieting ad). But anyway, I suppose I’d better get off and watch Spice and Wolf episode 2.
.

If ever you get to watch it, please avoid the Redux version at all costs, it’s just not as good as the original hand drawn film and totally destroys the feel of the original. The newly added CG parts in the Redux version stand out like a sore thumb - really bad. Luckily, even the Redux release features the original film as well, but by that time people have already ruined it for themselves by watching the updated version.

You do realise you sound like a fan of the original Star Wars trilogy that George Lucas apparently “keeps ruining” when he edits it to reflect his current CG tech obsession, don’t you? =D

Thanks, I’ll keep that in mind, but me getting my paws on a DVD version is unlikely (my own tiny hobby money goes into other things, and my anime friends never liked Ghost in the Shell), so I’m sort of limited to whatever my TV decides to show. Is there a way to tell the edit from the original from the get-go, maybe a different intro, or something?

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

I don’t know if she writes all of them, but I know she’s a songwriter.

Aha, thanks, interesting. And that accent of hers, is it Scottish?

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

I didn’t like the David Bryan track much, a bit like Tik Tak, just did’t click with me.

I mean, it’s Tiktak that may be styled after Bon Jovi (like all pop rock bands nowadays are, I’d say!), not the other way round =)

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

lol - You make a really interesting point there, and it’s not one I’m going to be able to answer very easily. I suppose I’d better divide it up into sections and try to explain it that way, because while what you say makes sense in some ways, it doesn’t in others.
...
So that’s my explanation, it was a long reply but I can’t explain it any other way. Think of it of a combination of everything I said above, and it’s that combination that made a 70’s woman more “natural” than a woman (most women) of today’s values.

Thanks for the explanation, I’ve read it and I think I get what you mean, but to tell the truth, it shocked me. I gather you’re in the UK - is it THAT BAD over there?? Is it indeed the rich spoilt Europe our anti-Western propaganda wants us to believe it is?? (I’m in Russia) I’m no stranger to cultural differences, but the way you put it, it’s a cultural abyss.

We do have our share of wannabe “it-girls” here who follow latest trends, but it’s mostly limited to celebrities and the really rich and non-workforce women (married to money; women who earn their own riches usually don’t have the time for that kind of fuss) A woman in the street here hardly uses any makeup or styles her hair in any fancy way. We tend to go overboard for “special occasions” like proms and weddings, but doesn’t everyone? =)

Overall, I’d say that you sound somewhat idealistic in your description of the 70s woman, but hey, that’s OK - we are entitled to our rosey illusions about the past, especially about the decade one was born in =). For me, it’s the age of the troubadours that seems “perfect”, when people were courageous, pure of spirit and capable of true love. // well I was actually born not in the Middle Ages but in the 1980s, but I grew disillusioned with the perceived values of that decade’s as I grew older; I’m 27 now //

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

but then she’ll get all modern about it and start trimming any stray ends and going into a fit if she so much as finds - OMFG - A SPLIT END!!!

Now it´s my turn to write a long post =)

As a woman with long hair who is heavily “old-fashioned” about hair care, I’ll share a secret with you. Split ends have always been a no-no. They mean you’ve done something wrong to your hair that damaged it - reckless combing, heat styling… And those heat “tongs” (and back-combing, chemical dyes and perms too!) are the biggest enemies of hair.

Split ends aren’t good not only because they look “dead”, but physically as well because they make hair tangle easier. So even a woman who hasn’t even ever blow dried her hair, never used hairspray and doesn’t use over-the-counter shampoos/conditioners to wash it - someone who goes completely natural - will be on the lookout for split ends (they do happen to everyone sometimes because even if you are super careful about your hair and sleep on a satin pillow, friction damage may occur).

A woman who is serious about the natural glorious look of her long hair isn’t going to be wearing it down much, either. When hair rubs against clothing and gets caught in the wind, it tangles (like crazy!!) and may split and break.

Yeah I know what I’m describing is not the 70s, it´s more Middle Ages. But this is what I think when I hear “natural”. And such women still exist all over the world. You could google “The Long Hair Community”, and there they are.

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

Her hair has the natural sheen to it, hasn’t been dyed

Awwww I hate to burst your bubble, but women did use hair dye in the 70s… and a LOT… Not to blame them, it actually started in Ancient Greece or even earlier…

There’s those 100% natural dyes called henna and indigo, they actually strengthen the hair shaft and give a very natural colour. In Asia, they have used henna and indigo since time immemorial for their health benefits.

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

The difference between the makeup styles then and now is that back then ... the difference between something that was naturally appealing and something that is overdone.

Now it’s interesting. I guess it’s a cultural thing indeed, but to me, “retro” makeup the way we see it on movie stars, fashion ads and posters from those decades looks massively overdone. More “stage makeup” than even “evening makeup”. Natalia Avelon in that vid was a perfect example of that, an average Russian woman wouldn’t want to be seen at work wearing so much eyeliner and eyeshadow!

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

Not all women are like modern women, there are exceptions, there are women who couldn’t give a crap about what everyone else does and chooses the “retro” or some other look. Those are the ones that stand out as exceptional to me, not just because of the resulting individuality, but because a person who practices it is more a rebel and non-conformist - and I’ve always respected that.

Interesting, and what about subcultures then? For instance, all the endless varieties of Goth people, they certainly stand out in the crowd… but taken as sub-subcultures, like at their parties and rock shows, they are much alike… (I’m saying sub-subcultures because a medieval Goth is not anything like a Cyber Goth) This has always been a split issue for me - I can’t seem to be able to decide whether to applaud someone who looks in real life like their idols do onstage, or condemn them for being conformist to their subculture… I guess it’s all down to the person, though. For some, it’s genuine artistic expression, and for some, just another circus uniform.

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

Women (and men) are far too influenced by the media nowadays. The media is dangerously powerful to say the least - certainly a lot more than it was in the 70’s. In the 70’s the public run rings around the powers that be, whereas nowadays it seems everyone (almost everyone) is wrapped around the fingers of companies like Apple, Goole, and Microsoft.

This is certainly a cultural thing. I agree that the media is one too powerful these days, but given the quite different political situation in Russia, it’s not exactly like this here even now (think “totalitarian state” and expand from there). “Our” 70s weren’t certainly any like “your” 70s, social awareness-wise or anything else. And I don’t even know if there exist reliable sources in English on the history of the USSR to direct you to… // or even if history lessons are TOS-compliant here =) so I’d rather stop now //

What I love about the 70s is its progressive rock!! For instance, Van der Graaf Generator. Love that album name and cover. So clever…

But even though I am not such a big fan of the 80s anymore, I like the look the 80s metal bands had onstage. It was truly theatric! Here is a live video of one of my all time favourite all-female bands Warbride; they played super technical prog metal with inspiring lyrics, but haven’t even secured a record deal. Their only legacy is a demo collection.

No, no, I haven’t heard it, thanks a lot!! I’ve only read the original book. It’s weird actually how I never came across it, I’m reading the wiki article now and it says Phil Lynott, Justin Hayward and Chris Thompson were on it!

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

Forget your speakers for this one, just plug in your headphones and switch YouTube to the highest possible resolution for the best sound.

I only use the speakers at work. I much prefer headphones.

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

Same can be said for audio, do you Digital or do you Analogue? - same thing. Analogue audio is far superior to anything we have in digital systems…

pumeco - 12 July 2012 05:59 PM

Not only is it a fantastic musical piece (the whole album), but some will even be able to pick-up on the unmistakable fact that it’s an analogue recording. Being originally recorded in analogue means it actually sounds good (even when blessed with YouTube conversion).

It’s a fave flame war subject on the recording and audiophile forums… Now I won’t be arguing… it’s always pointless… we’re all entitled to our own perceptions… but I’ll say this one bit.

It’s not about the tools, it’s about THE ARTIST. // + the producer and the sound engineer //

To sum it up, everything has its uses. A time, a place for everything and everyone (c) Van Halen. // this is actually the way I approach life on the whole… //

And now I owe y’all a Justin Hayward track, and no Nights in White Satin it´s gonna be… That one is great but waaaay overplayed =) So now we’re speaking science fiction, let it be a track off To Our Children’s Children’s Children...

You do realise you sound like a fan of the original Star Wars trilogy that George Lucas apparently “keeps ruining” when he edits it to reflect his current CG tech obsession, don’t you? =D

Thanks, I’ll keep that in mind, but me getting my paws on a DVD version is unlikely (my own tiny hobby money goes into other things, and my anime friends never liked Ghost in the Shell), so I’m sort of limited to whatever my TV decides to show. Is there a way to tell the edit from the original from the get-go, maybe a different intro, or something?

I do complain a lot, like an old grump really but believe me, what they did to it was beyond belief - I mean really bad. I started to capture some screen shots for you so you could see the differences, then thought to check YouTube and sure enough, someone has already compared them side-by-side.

They gave this sort of treatment, here and there, throughout the movie, and it was far from an being an improvement, I thought surely all they had to do to cash-in some more on it was to restore it, not screw around with it. The title sequence you see here doesn’t happen right at the beginning though, there’s some action before the titles actually start, but the way to tell the difference from the get go is the opening scene where she’s on the top of a building and jumps off it. If it looks like a smooth CG character then you’re watching the crappy version. If she looks hand drawn like the rest of it then you’re watching the proper version (which is absolute awesomeness, trust me).

I was shocked at first when you said your friends don’t like it, but then I suppose it’s not everyone’s cup of tea. That said, I recall you appreciate the backgrounds and work that goes into them, and if you like a story where the characters bond in a really good way, you will love Ghost in the Shell. The only problem with it is that it’s quite an involved thing, quite deep, and if a person was to watch it from anything other than the first movie, they’re just not going to get it and they won’t understand the characters.

Thanks for the explanation, I’ve read it and I think I get what you mean, but to tell the truth, it shocked me. I gather you’re in the UK - is it THAT BAD over there?? Is it indeed the rich spoilt Europe our anti-Western propaganda wants us to believe it is?? (I’m in Russia) I’m no stranger to cultural differences, but the way you put it, it’s a cultural abyss.

We do have our share of wannabe “it-girls” here who follow latest trends, but it’s mostly limited to celebrities and the really rich and non-workforce women (married to money; women who earn their own riches usually don’t have the time for that kind of fuss) A woman in the street here hardly uses any makeup or styles her hair in any fancy way. We tend to go overboard for “special occasions” like proms and weddings, but doesn’t everyone? =)

Overall, I’d say that you sound somewhat idealistic in your description of the 70s woman, but hey, that’s OK - we are entitled to our rosey illusions about the past, especially about the decade one was born in =). For me, it’s the age of the troubadours that seems “perfect”, when people were courageous, pure of spirit and capable of true love. // well I was actually born not in the Middle Ages but in the 1980s, but I grew disillusioned with the perceived values of that decade’s as I grew older; I’m 27 now //

Yup, it’s that bad over here (and getting worse). And yup, the UK is indeed the spoilt brat of the EU. The “so-called” rich live beyond their means and will never pay off the mortgage that is funding their lifestyle, the poor are bled absolutely senseless, and the cost of utilities and food is beyond the joke. How does £50 per month grab you? That’s not a bill for running up the telephone calls to another planet, nah, that’s just the bill for that most essential liquid - water. I mean, if that was the cost per year it would be bad enough, and if it were per quarter it would be taking the piss, but that is the cost per month. I could go on (it get’s worse), but I agree this is not the place for such a discussion.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

Now it´s my turn to write a long post =)

As a woman with long hair who is heavily “old-fashioned” about hair care, I’ll share a secret with you. Split ends have always been a no-no. They mean you’ve done something wrong to your hair that damaged it - reckless combing, heat styling… And those heat “tongs” (and back-combing, chemical dyes and perms too!) are the biggest enemies of hair.

Split ends aren’t good not only because they look “dead”, but physically as well because they make hair tangle easier. So even a woman who hasn’t even ever blow dried her hair, never used hairspray and doesn’t use over-the-counter shampoos/conditioners to wash it - someone who goes completely natural - will be on the lookout for split ends (they do happen to everyone sometimes because even if you are super careful about your hair and sleep on a satin pillow, friction damage may occur).

A woman who is serious about the natural glorious look of her long hair isn’t going to be wearing it down much, either. When hair rubs against clothing and gets caught in the wind, it tangles (like crazy!!) and may split and break.

Yeah I know what I’m describing is not the 70s, it´s more Middle Ages. But this is what I think when I hear “natural”. And such women still exist all over the world. You could google “The Long Hair Community”, and there they are.

OK, that made me laugh, I feel really up on hair and hair-care technology now. Believe it or not, you’re talking to someone who’s never purchased a hair care product in his life. I just grab whatever is in the shower and squirt that on. One week I might smell like apple, another I might smell like things I can’t even explain. My sister once even tried to stop me using her shampoo by saving the old bottle and filling it with something else. I used it and told her to bin it because I thought it had sand in it. Apparently I’d washed my hair with face scrub and it’s supposed to have some sort of gritty particles in it.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

Awwww I hate to burst your bubble, but women did use hair dye in the 70s… and a LOT… Not to blame them, it actually started in Ancient Greece or even earlier…

There’s those 100% natural dyes called henna and indigo, they actually strengthen the hair shaft and give a very natural colour. In Asia, they have used henna and indigo since time immemorial for their health benefits.

I don’t mind dyed hair, but by natural I mean mainly the style, just to let it be how it wants to be, that sort of thing. If it’s flat, let it be. If it’s wavy, let it be. Back to nature, back to natural.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

Now it’s interesting. I guess it’s a cultural thing indeed, but to me, “retro” makeup the way we see it on movie stars, fashion ads and posters from those decades looks massively overdone. More “stage makeup” than even “evening makeup”. Natalia Avelon in that vid was a perfect example of that, an average Russian woman wouldn’t want to be seen at work wearing so much eyeliner and eyeshadow!

To be fair, I’m not surprised Russian women aren’t heavy on the makeup and I think that’s a good thing. Russia certainly produces some amazing looking women and I suppose the better a model is, the less makeup she needs. So yup, that’s a good thing.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

Interesting, and what about subcultures then? For instance, all the endless varieties of Goth people, they certainly stand out in the crowd… but taken as sub-subcultures, like at their parties and rock shows, they are much alike… (I’m saying sub-subcultures because a medieval Goth is not anything like a Cyber Goth) This has always been a split issue for me - I can’t seem to be able to decide whether to applaud someone who looks in real life like their idols do onstage, or condemn them for being conformist to their subculture… I guess it’s all down to the person, though. For some, it’s genuine artistic expression, and for some, just another circus uniform.

I should probably point out that I’m not obsessed solely with retro women and I think I might have given that impression. I like the Goth look, the oriental look, the dangerous look, lots of looks. It would probably be easier to say what I don’t like, because that’s so easy.

What I don’t like are women who are just like everyone else, those who dare not be different from the crowd. But I like different things for different reasons. With the Japanese it’s the level-headed, calm disposition I like the most. With Goth it’s more to do with the look just being interesting and individual. With retro, it seems to be a good balance of the two. A retro girl probably wouldn’t be as loud as a Goth, and a Goth probably wouldn’t be as level-headed as a retro girl. The ideal is the everyday woman, but not many everyday women have individuality about them. They all read the same magazines, do the same thing, and shop at the same stores that put out mass produced clothes.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

What I love about the 70s is its progressive rock!! For instance, Van der Graaf Generator. Love that album name and cover. So clever…

But even though I am not such a big fan of the 80s anymore, I like the look the 80s metal bands had onstage. It was truly theatric! Here is a live video of one of my all time favourite all-female bands Warbride; they played super technical prog metal with inspiring lyrics, but haven’t even secured a record deal. Their only legacy is a demo collection.

Unfortunately, it’s often not what you know, it’s who you know. There are some crazy-good artists out there who’ll never get a record deal because their dad doesn’t work in a respected recording studio, or their mother isn’t make-up artist for some famous singer. As for the 80’s, the only thing I liked about it was the music and hardware that was available then.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

You’re welcome! It should be, it’s British =) Most 60s & 70s bands I love were British…

Aye, were pretty good when it comes to music, movies, prestige car brands and design. Can’t think of anything else though. Most of that is in the past though now. I mean we sold all our car brands off to other countries. Aston Martin, Bentley, Jaguar, Land Rover, Rolls Royce, all gone, no longer British. In fact if I recall I think the only one left that remains British, is Lotus. I’d check it out only I get the impression even that one will have been sold off as well by now - lol

Not that I care anymore seeing as the government makes sure I can’t afford to run a car.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

No, no, I haven’t heard it, thanks a lot!! I’ve only read the original book. It’s weird actually how I never came across it, I’m reading the wiki article now and it says Phil Lynott, Justin Hayward and Chris Thompson were on it!

It’s a classic for sure is that one, well worth a listen.

Mustakettu85 - 13 July 2012 09:47 AM

It’s a fave flame war subject on the recording and audiophile forums… Now I won’t be arguing… it’s always pointless… we’re all entitled to our own perceptions… but I’ll say this one bit.

It’s not about the tools, it’s about THE ARTIST. // + the producer and the sound engineer //

To sum it up, everything has its uses. A time, a place for everything and everyone (c) Van Halen. // this is actually the way I approach life on the whole… //

And now I owe y’all a Justin Hayward track, and no Nights in White Satin it´s gonna be… That one is great but waaaay overplayed =) So now we’re speaking science fiction, let it be a track off To Our Children’s Children’s Children...

Your “little hobby” wouldn’t happen to be audio would it? Analogue recording isn’t designed to save you (and can’t save you), people practiced the art of analogue recording before we even had digital. But I know what you mean, you can push analogue and it’s forgiving, digital isn’t. But then that’s what is expected when a superior technology is compared to an inferior one. I’m quite passionate about the subject although I never participate in such forums. I prefer watching YouTube videos of people who have just got around to realising what they’ve been missing. They pick up some recording gear or a real analogue Hi-Fi and can’t wait to show it off to fellow fanatics - love it.

@Jaderail
Nope, never heard of that one. It wasn’t melodic enough for me to like it but the animation looked really good!

@Kettu
I just realised I listened to your links, posted something similar, but forgot to comment on yours. Of those I think the Doro one was best. The unsigned band you posted, I didn’t like it much but I did get the impression they’re a capable band. I’m pretty clueless about guitar music, so even if there was some fancy technique it wouldn’t be blazingly obvious to me.

The best part was the turntable shots, but as we’re onto girls dancing around trying to look sexy, here’s a bunch of girls (Russian Girls) that actually do look sexy, in fact it’s easy the hottest music video I’ve seen to date.

WARNINGThis HD video contains images of extreme sexuality and is NOT recommended for males working in an office environment. If your office desk starts levitating, you’ll have only yourself to blame.

One may theorise they introduced all those “improvements” to get more “body shots” in, like, in an attempt to lure a younger audience in. Or maybe they felt that the Vachovsky brothers “desecrated” the green numbers thing when they stole it for The Matrix, and wanted to distance themselves from it… These are the only semicoherent reasons I was able to think of - the new CG parts do look generic, and the glow on the hand drawn parts washes out pretty much everything.

pumeco - 14 July 2012 10:00 PM

the way to tell the difference from the get go is the opening scene where she’s on the top of a building and jumps off it. If it looks like a smooth CG character then you’re watching the crappy version. If she looks hand drawn like the rest of it then you’re watching the proper version (which is absolute awesomeness, trust me).

Thanks! The work that went into the artwork is totally awesome, and the background music works well.

pumeco - 14 July 2012 10:00 PM

That said, I recall you appreciate the backgrounds and work that goes into them, and if you like a story where the characters bond in a really good way, you will love Ghost in the Shell. The only problem with it is that it’s quite an involved thing, quite deep, and if a person was to watch it from anything other than the first movie, they’re just not going to get it and they won’t understand the characters.

I don’t mind deep stories, I was reared on classic Russian literature and oldschool science fiction. Ghost in the Shell looks heavily influenced by the works of William Gibson and Philip K Dick, so I hope I will get to watch it sooner than the local definition of “soon” (tm) is =D

pumeco - 14 July 2012 10:00 PM

Yup, it’s that bad over here (and getting worse). And yup, the UK is indeed the spoilt brat of the EU. The “so-called” rich live beyond their means and will never pay off the mortgage that is funding their lifestyle, the poor are bled absolutely senseless, and the cost of utilities and food is beyond the joke.

pumeco - 14 July 2012 10:00 PM

I mean we sold all our car brands off to other countries. Aston Martin, Bentley, Jaguar, Land Rover, Rolls Royce, all gone, no longer British. In fact if I recall I think the only one left that remains British, is Lotus. I’d check it out only I get the impression even that one will have been sold off as well by now - lol

Not that I care anymore seeing as the government makes sure I can’t afford to run a car.

My sister once even tried to stop me using her shampoo by saving the old bottle and filling it with something else. I used it and told her to bin it because I thought it had sand in it. Apparently I’d washed my hair with face scrub and it’s supposed to have some sort of gritty particles in it.

Oh my LOL Your sister must love you, she could have put something way more nasty there =D

pumeco - 14 July 2012 10:00 PM

To be fair, I’m not surprised Russian women aren’t heavy on the makeup and I think that’s a good thing. Russia certainly produces some amazing looking women and I suppose the better a model is, the less makeup she needs. So yup, that’s a good thing.

I’ve often heard that about Russian women… even though the Russian women people know abroad are mostly the richer type who wear high heels, styled hair and tons of mascara even when they go swimming =) I guess the real reason why foreigners find Russians attractive is the fact that there is actually a lot of nationalities in this giant country, so the “Russian” you see is always a mixture of various bloodlines, and biologically, animals are attracted to diverse genes.

pumeco - 14 July 2012 10:00 PM

It would probably be easier to say what I don’t like, because that’s so easy.

Let me guess.. the overprocessed wannabe-celebrity look?

pumeco - 14 July 2012 10:00 PM

The ideal is the everyday woman, but not many everyday women have individuality about them. They all read the same magazines, do the same thing, and shop at the same stores that put out mass produced clothes.

Don´t get me started on those idiotic clothing stores… I had to buy men’s shirts because the stores I can afford here haven’t carried a simple white or black blouse for YEARS - it´s apparently out of fashion. I keep meaning to buy a sewing machine, but then, it’s not like you could just walk in into any store and buy quality cloth to sew your own garments - it’s either too pricey or too horrible to ever waste your time sewing stuff out of it… and the buttons etc cost a fortune too!

Pre-made Goth-styled and other subculture outfits are hard to come by here, and the prices are totally over the top for anything that is above a sub-par Korean sweatshop quality-wise. And the styles are same old same old. So I’ve never really looked the part, LOL

There are some local fashion designers that create beautiful stuff, like, I totally adore these garments made in the Russian tradition of gold embroidery, but you may imagine they aren’t particularly affordable, either…

Unfortunately, it’s often not what you know, it’s who you know. There are some crazy-good artists out there who’ll never get a record deal because their dad doesn’t work in a respected recording studio, or their mother isn’t make-up artist for some famous singer.

Too true. In Russia, though, we think less about family being involved, but more about who sleeps with whom.

Major labels are evil anywhere, though. I’ve seen major labels ruin my favourite bands, either by “art direction” (WHY sign a band you would want to forcibly change later????) or simply by contracts that won’t allow them do stuff for other labels - and their label simply refuses to release their stuff. And so on.

Fortunately, there are new business models entering the market, so I hope all those labels are going to die out some day.

Speaking of which - the band I mentioned in one of the posts, Nostalghia, is gathering funds for their new album, so if anyone liked their stuff, you could help them out here:

Your “little hobby” wouldn’t happen to be audio would it? Analogue recording isn’t designed to save you (and can’t save you), people practiced the art of analogue recording before we even had digital. But I know what you mean, you can push analogue and it’s forgiving, digital isn’t. But then that’s what is expected when a superior technology is compared to an inferior one. I’m quite passionate about the subject although I never participate in such forums. I prefer watching YouTube videos of people who have just got around to realising what they’ve been missing. They pick up some recording gear or a real analogue Hi-Fi and can’t wait to show it off to fellow fanatics - love it.

Yeah, you got it right, recording is one of my little hobbies. I still wouldn’t call digital inherently inferior, though - just different. As for me, I’m passionate about “different courses for different horses” =) This is why I’m mostly a lurker everywhere as I see no point in defending the middle ground… the DAZ forums are the only place I am active in (I just had to defend 3Delight from the ignorant assumptions that come from mostly seeing the work of those who fired a 3D app only yesterday… and then I just felt good here LOL)

Actually now I’ve said it, I’d liken 3Delight to digital recording and unbiased renderers like Lux to analogue. Both can produce great art, but the approaches are very different, and analogue/Lux is much more intuitive, though often unwieldy.

Besides, you’ve just said it yourself - “what they have been missing”, i.e. those people are not noobs. An experienced person may very well be able to perceive the difference, but not everyone may… Hell, the loudness war was started by pros, so not even they are “holy”.

Ah, Joakim Larsson… Thanks, this is nostalgic… I used to like his band a lot when I was younger, though I liked the album that came after that best. Here’s one of my top tracks (though this vid is definitely cheesy, to my mind - I never thought the guys from Europe that attractive, especially Joey, but I know a lot of girls would disagree)

I just realised I listened to your links, posted something similar, but forgot to comment on yours. Of those I think the Doro one was best. The unsigned band you posted, I didn’t like it much but I did get the impression they’re a capable band. I’m pretty clueless about guitar music, so even if there was some fancy technique it wouldn’t be blazingly obvious to me.

I see. Well, Doro IS the best!!! (yes I’m a huuuuuuge fan) And it’s true, it takes some intimacy with the guitar to actually be able to appreciate the technique.

Impressive stuff… reminded me of Rush, who are among the kings of the concept album. Actually the track I thought of was this one - not SF, but they do have a lot of SF stuff, in case there are folks here who’ve never heard them before…

Impressive stuff… reminded me of Rush, who are among the kings of the concept album. Actually the track I thought of was this one - not SF, but they do have a lot of SF stuff, in case there are folks here who’ve never heard them before…

@Mustakettu
Oh, that’s nothing, there’s a lot worse than that throughout the film. You’re watching a hand-drawn character one minute, then all of a sudden it’s a silky-smooth CG figure for certain shots. And yes indeed, the “The Matrix Code” design people recognise was actually taken from Ghost in the Shell. A lot of big movies are based on anime, especially Tarantino films. Spielberg is about to have a go now, he’s been granted the job of making a live action version of Ghost in the Shell. Should be good if he keeps it true to the anime and manages to capture the mood of the film.

Regards the two links, I couldn’t reach the first one, seems like it’s blocked in the UK.

The other link, regards the minimum wage in Russia, well, I can totally understand why the guy is happy now, so he should be. My complaint about the bills here is warranted though, because the difference between the UK and most other countries is this: Most countries where people complain about the standards of living, the wage, even if it’s low, is more in keeping with the rest of the economy. Here, it’s just totally out of control, because here, the standard of living in comparison to how much we pay out is totally out of balance. I mentioned water because that’s a perfect example of it. There is no way on this earth that £50 per month for water can be justified. They’re not pumping liquid gold through the taps, it’s just water.

So although we have a higher minimum wage, the poor in this country are left with nothing net taxes and utilities. It’s like I said, we’re screwed senseless here - the UK is for rich people - nice place if you can afford it. Even as we speak I’m looking into emigrating. I tried Bulgaria a few years ago, was going to buy a run-down wreck of a place for around four to five thousand and do it up a bit at a time. That was going to be my escape from this place. It would have meant a totally different lifestyle and I was really looking forward to it, didn’t work out though - couldn’t find anywhere.

I must spend 90% of my online time figuring a way out of this place, thank god for the internet!

Regards the Russian bloodline, I agree, I think that makes sense due to all the countries that border Russia, and actually, I just posted that “Russian Girls” video out of fun to see if you’d call me anything. I used Ascania’s post as an excuse to post it. I thought after all that stuff I posted about retro women, me getting excited about a stereotypical babe video, you might say something witty.

I was expecting to be called a sexist pig or something like that :-D

Regards the clothes and you wanting to make your own; now that’s what I’m talking about. I say good on you because not only is it a feminine thing to do (making clothes), but you end up with something unique out of it. It’s a shame you have trouble getting your preferred fabric and stuff, I’m sorry to hear it. Typical that is, I mean here we have a dedicated superstore that’s packed to the seams with fabric yet I don’t see any women here wearing anything original (hardly ever). The clothes you linked to look nice quality and are feminine. They just don’t wear fancy stuff like that over here, most women here wear boring stuff they pick-up at the superstore, and apart from them having slight differences between them, they’re practically all the same (and therefore so are the women that wear them).

Regards the Europe video, have to say I got the hots for that big Gothic house in the background :-P

Anyway, time for me to grab a midnight snack, a can of Strongbow, and watch Spice and Wolf episode 3.